On Jun 13, 2005, at 5:56 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>
> The value of [message id] uniquely identifies the message. When
> present, it is the responsibility of the sender to insure that each
> message is uniquely identified. A receiver MAY treat all messages
> that contain the same [message id] as the same message. No specific
> algorithm for the generation of unique values of [message id] is
> given, however methods such as the use of an IRI that exists within
> a domain owned by the sender combined with a sequence satisfies the
> uniqueness criteria but may not be the best practice from a
> security perspective.
>
As discussed on yesterdays telcon, the problem I have with the above
language is that its not clear what behavior we are allowing when we
say: "a receiver MAY treat all messages that contain the same
[message id] as the same message". Is my receiver compliant with WS-
Addr if it:
(i) silently ignores a second message with the same [message id] as a
previously received one
(ii) generates a fault when it receives a second message with the
same [message id] as a previously received one
(iii) processes a second message with the same [message id] as a
previously received one
(iv) all of the above or some other combination
I would prefer that we spell out the allowed behavior or, if we don't
constrain it any way, be explicit that the behavior is undefined.
Marc.
---
Marc Hadley <marc.hadley at sun.com>
Business Alliances, CTO Office, Sun Microsystems.